Waterboarding: Illegal by Law, Legal by Circumstance?

Controversy over waterboarding has surfaced in recent years. There are two different techniques when referring to waterboarding. The first involves pumping water directly in the stomach. “This creates intense pain. It feels like your organs are on fire,” says Darius Rejali, a professor at Reed College. The other technique which is most commonly used involves lying the suspect in an incline position and pouring water on their face. The face is usually covered by a towel or cloth. This creates instant fear of drowning for the suspect. Proponents of waterboarding will argue that it is a legitimate method of interrogation that has saved lives in our war against terrorism while opponents insists it violates United States law as an inhumane form of torture.

The debate over waterboarding is new, but the interrogation technique is not. “Its use was first documented in the 14th century, according to Ed Peters, a historian at the University of Pennsylvania. It was known variously as "water torture," the "water cure" or tormenta de toca — a phrase that refers to the thin piece of cloth placed over the victim's mouth.” In the 14th century it was normal  to use water to provoke confessions. "The thing you could not do in torture was injure the body or cause death," Peters says. Waterboarding causes both mental and physical pain while leaving no marks on the body. That is why it is such a popular interrogation technique. Many countries banned waterboarding as an acceptable interrogation technique around the 1800s but the practice never completely disappeared. It surfaced again in the 20th century. “The interrogation method was used by the Japanese in World War II, by U.S. troops in the Philippines and by the French in Algeria. In Cambodia, the Khmer Rogue used waterboarding against its own people. The British used it against both Arabs and Jews in occupied Palestine in the 1930s. In the 1970s, it was widely used in Latin America, particularly under the military dictatorships in Chile and Argentina”  There has also been uses of waterboarding on American soil. “In 1983, Texas Sheriff James Parker was charged, along with three of his deputies, for handcuffing prisoners to chairs, placing towels over their faces, and pouring water on the cloth until they gave what the officers considered to be confessions.” Serious debates over waterboarding did not surface until the 21st century during President George W. Bush’s term in office.

In 2002, President Bush’s lawyers advised him to approve the use of enhanced interrogation techniques to question terrorists suspected to be linked with the 9/11 attack on the United States. “In 2005, Congress adopted the Detainee Treatment Act, which prohibited the ‘cruel, inhumane, or degrading’ treatment of prisoners. However, in signing the bill, President Bush issued a statement implying that, under the Constitution, he was not bound by this provision of the Act.” There have been three major treaties that the United States has signed and ratified which prohibit the United States’ usage of waterboarding on terrorist suspects. The first, ratified in 1955, is Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Second, ratified in 1992, is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Third, Ratified in 1994, is the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment. “The United States has enacted statutes prohibiting torture and cruel or inhuman treatment.  It is these statutes which make waterboarding illegal.The four principal statutes which Congress has adopted to implement the provisions of the foregoing treaties are the Torture Act, the War Crimes Act, and the laws entitled ‘Prohibition on Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of Persons Under Custody or Control of the United States Government’ and ‘Additional Prohibition on Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.’” The Bush administration has admitted that the CIA used waterboarding on  only three terrorists suspects. These suspects include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zabaydah, and Abd Al Rahim al-Hashiri. Even though waterboarding is clearly illegal by the statutes against torture, CIA Director Michael Hayden defended the use of waterboarding as legal because of the outrage over the 9/11 attack on the United States. “‘We used it against three detainees because of extraordinary circumstances at the time,’ Hayden said. ‘There was the belief that additional catastrophic attacks against the homeland were inevitable. And we have had limited knowledge about al Qaeda and its workings.’” Statements have been released that suggest the United States has conducted many more interrogations including waterboarding other than the three that they have admitted to. “Human Rights Watch recently released a report detailing the accounts of 14 Libyan men who claim they were detained and, in some cases, subject to harsh interrogations by the U.S. before being transferred back to Libyan prisons.” Also, it has been revealed that the CIA has destroyed evidence of waterboarding terrorist suspects. “The Justice Department disclosed that the CIA had destroyed 92 videotapes of harsh interrogation sessions made in 2002.” This indicates that even though they approved of “enhanced interrogation techniques”, they knew they were unlawful. This also suggests that there could have been many more terrorist suspects who were subjected to waterboarding.

The reason the Bush administration thought that waterboarding was a lawful form of torture is that they believed it would lead them to Osama bin Laden. “Defense Secretary Leon Panetta confirmed what many have believed since the death of Osama bin Laden: Our waterboarding of top Al Qaeda operatives in the wake of 9/11 ultimately led to the whereabouts and killing of the terrorist mastermind.” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was said to break very quickly under the technique of waterboarding. Michael B. Mukasey stated, “He loosed a torrent of information—including eventually the nickname of a trusted courier of bin Laden.” Another member of al Qaeda, Abu Zubaydeh, was subjected to the same techniques. “When he broke, he said that he and other members of al Qaeda were obligated to resist only until they could no longer do so, at which point it became permissible for them to yield. ‘Do this for all the brothers,’ he advised his interrogators.” Not only did the information that was provided during these interrogations lead to bin Laden, it also led to the capture of many other important personnel associated with bin Laden.

After taking office, Obama and his administration have vowed to not use waterboarding as an interrogation technique for terrorism suspects. “Waterboarding is torture. My Justice Department will not justify it, will not rationalize it and will not condone it,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder stated, “We cannot ask other nations to stand by us in the pursuit of justice if we are not viewed as being in pursuit of that ideal ourselves.” Waterboarding is in fact illegal by law. The United States holds themselves to a higher standard than other countries which is why Obama has banned waterboarding. However, it remains a sensitive issue.  If it saves American lives and if it protects an attack on the homeland then waterboarding should at a minimum be considered.

In the Midst of the Ruble

On September 11, 2001, four commercial airplanes were hijacked and flown into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington D.C. The fourth plane never arrived at its target but crashed in a field in Pennsylvania. The attacks were led by 19 men linked with the Islamic terrorist group, al-Qaeda. This event is often referred to as 9/11 and resulted in large-scale death and destruction, triggering major U.S. initiatives to fight terrorism, which defined the presidency of George W. Bush. According to statisticbrian.com, over 3,000 people were killed during the attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C., including more than 400 police officers and firefighters. The event of 9/11 was a worldwide tragedy that shocked the world and touched the soul of every American.

Nearly every American can remember what they were doing on September 11, 2001, whether they were at work, school, or even on vacation. Although I was only six years old, I can specifically remember where I was, and what I was doing on that day. Because I was homeschooled, I was at home, working on school work when I heard some of my siblings causing a ruckus downstairs. I remember wondering what was going on, because the TV was never on, and I heard it blaring. After I ran downstairs and looked at the TV, I instantly felt scared, not for myself, but for my dad, who worked in a tall skyscraper in Atlanta, Georgia. Our home telephone was ringing like crazy. My dad kept calling, my grandma and granddad kept calling. My mom was extremely concerned for my dad, and it just seemed like everybody that I knew was freaking out. It was chaos, and we weren't even in New York City or D.C.! I felt like I was in the midst of the ruble. I could not even begin to imagine what it was like in those cities except for what I was seeing on the TV. The memories of those attacks caused me to dislike flying on airplanes. Everytime I fly, I always have a little thought in the back of my mind that the plane that I am on might be hijacked.

This heinous act of terrorism shocked, not only America, but the world. Not one single person in the United States of America was NOT terrified. What had occurred on that day was horrendous. It was like living a nightmare. It affected each and every American citizen in some fashion. For a long time, a bias against the Middle Eastern race was evident. Many people assumed that anyone from the Middle East was a would-be terrorist. Traveling became more difficult as numerous changes to provide better security for travelers were put into effect. Also, the atrocious actions of 9/11 spurred the hunt for an evil man (Osama bin Laden) and for the extermination of al-Qaeda.

America is a different place than it was pre-9/11. Everyone who is old enough to remember that day has his own story of that day. It's amazing what kind of stories that you can find or hear, many of which can be found on a website that has accounts of where and what people were doing.

Check these stories out, and let them bring you back to that day. Where were you on that horrific day of 9/11? How did it affect YOU as an American? Although September 11, 2001 was tragic, good did come from it. Want to know what happened a few weeks after 9/11? All I can say is… AMERICA.

The Pace of War

The Pace of War

The Vietnam War was a struggle between nationalist forces who attempted to unify the country of Vietnam under a communist government and the United States who attempted to prevent the spread of communism. The Vietnam War was a long costly war for the united states that lasted from 1955-1975. Because of the length of the war, there was four different presidents who took office during the war: Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon. However, I am going to talk about Eisenhower and Kennedy, the first two United States presidents involved in the war, and the decisions that they made.

Eisenhower was the first president to go headfirst into the Vietnam conflicts. Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890-1969), a Republican, was the popular 34th President of the United States, who served two terms from 1953 to 1961. Prior to his presidency, Eisenhower was a military man, commanding the D-Day invasion while serving as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe during World War II. In February 1954, President Eisenhower refused to commit American troops to the Franco-Vietnamese War. In a press conference he stated, "I cannot conceive of a greater tragedy for America than to get heavily involved now in an all-out war in any of those regions." However, by April, he sent no U.S. troops to the region, he authorized military aid to the French. After France surrendered to the Vietnamese, Eisenhower's administration aided anti-communist leader Ngo Dinh Diem (south Vietnam) in consolidating power in Saigon. Throughout his second term as president, Eisenhower remained committed to Diem's often-tyrannical regime.

President John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) was the 35th president of the United States. Elected in 1960 at the age of 43, he became the youngest person ever to be voted into the White House. Kennedy served from 1961 until his assassination in November 1963. In 1961, he had a new team to investigate the conditions in South Vietnam. This investigation was known as the “December 1961 White Papers”. The content in the white paper was basically a cry for more aid to Vietnam. Kennedy decided to send more advisors and machinery but would not send troops. During his years as president, Kennedy tripled the amount of American economic and military aid to the South Vietnamese and increased the number of U.S. military advisors in Indochina. He refused to withdraw from the quickly rising conflict in Vietnam. In 1963 Kennedy put his support into a coup. Then, on November 2, 1963, Diem and his brother were brutally assassinated. Three weeks later Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963.

Since Eisenhower and Kennedy were the first two presidents of the war, the decisions that they made effected the pace of the war and essentially the outcome of the war. Think about it... How different would the war have been if it were not for their decisions? Would have Kennedy died the way that he did? Possibly. Could have the war been shorter or longer? Absolutely.

Out of Town Heroes

Why is the United States Fighting Other People's Wars?
It's a rather simple question, but the answer is always complicated. Why Korea? Why Vietnam? Is America always trying to be the hero or is there a valid reason to us fighting in other countries?
Here are quick and simple answers as to why we've fought in the above stated wars.
Why did the United states get involved in Korea? The Korean War was fought by the United States in order to halt the Communist, power-hungry North Korean's from taking over South Korea and spreading Communism. Also, South Korea is an American ally.
Many people say that the U.S. getting involved in Korea was a mistake because it was expensive and also 33,000 American soldiers were killed. If the U.S. did not get involved in Korea then the entire country would be communist. Because we got involved, to this day, Korea is still North and South Korea. Only North Korea is communist.
Why did the United States fight in Vietnam? The main point of the Vietnam War was to prevent communism from spreading in Southeast Asia. The American leaders were concerned that communist would gain control of Vietnam and from there, other nations. America aided the U.N. in Vietnam so they were not alone in the fight.
There are many viewpoints concerning the Vietnam war, but the main two are that the United States had no business in Vietnam, and should remain peaceful. The opposing side argued that United States has the responsibility to defend those in need to create new peace or in other words, to stop communism. Once again, if the U.S. did not get involved in Vietnam, then the Vietnamese would not have had 15+ years of independence.
Some American's might think that it was a bad idea to get involved in Korea and Vietnam, but it was not. The United States did not get involved just to fight. They got involved to stop the expansion of communism. Our American leaders believe in freedom. In the end, that's what it was about, freedom and the termination of communism.
Do you think that it was a bad idea for the United States to get involved?

Blog Post #1: Pros and Cons of the Military Draft

Pros and Cons of Having a Military Draft

In reality there are pros and cons to everything. However, I have selected to write about the pros cons of a military draft. The reason why I selected this topic was because recently have done a few assignments based around the Vietnam War. A military draft was forced for the war for many reasons. This act of a draft has been a major controversy since its creation and has pros and cons for either side of the argument.

Pros:

1. Assembly

   The military draft enables, in a time of need, our government the power of recruiting a large mass of people in a short period of time. This also allows the military to train millions of people very rapidly. In 1940, according to www.sss.gov, the Selective Service System was signed by President Franklin Roosevelt and them immediately implemented. Although, in the beginning, the required ages were all men aged 21-30. Presently, the age requirements are the ages 18-25. With this being said, while in a serious time of need, the government has the power to have all signees report to training no matter what the crisis is.

2. Cost

   

   Having a draft would be cheaper than none at all. Why? Because the steady flow of draftees creates a streamline into basic training. Also, a draft would create lower military cost. Yes, the army would have to pay soldiers more money because of the increasing numbers of soldiers, and the food and equipment cost would go up as well. This would nearly annihilate the advertising and recruitment costs. In order to save money, however, only the necessary amount of soldiers should be drafted, therefore saving the money used on recruitment.

3. Size

   The most obvious pro of a draft would be the size of the military force when completed. Our military forces would double and maybe even triple nearly as fast as you could blink. There would be zero shortages of soldiers as well as zero failed recruitment goals. The size of the military would be scarier than it already is.

Cons:

1. Quality

   Since the 70's, the U.S. military has maintained and all volunteer military. In other words, the men and women serving our country actually want to serve, they want to be where they are, doing what they're doing. This means, instead of a short 2-year contract, soldiers are staying in for multiple years at a time making them very skilled and experienced. The U.S. military is, without a doubt massive, but the number of soldiers being trained is much smaller than it would be if there were to be a draft. Military training is a long process, but extremely thorough. With a draft, the training would be a lot quicker, due to the massive amounts of people that would need training. The goal would go from making quality soldiers to teaching men how to aim, shoot, and reload.

2. Casualties

   According to Joshua Goldstein, a professor at the American University, the War on Terror has seen fewer war deaths than any other decade in the past century. I believe that it's because of the training that was received by the soldiers, and the experience of the soldiers. If a draft occurred, the number of lightly trained, inexperienced soldiers would increase, along with the number of casualties. More men, more deaths. Especially if they aren't trained as well as they should be.

3. Violation of Freedom

   

The draft takes away ones free will. It takes away the freedom to choose your own life path. The draft raises many issues among anti-war parities and few religious views. Technically, these parties are more-or-less protected under the 1st Amendment, which simply protects, speech, peaceful protest, and religion. Having a draft would, by law, force them to serve against there will.

These are only a few of the pros and cons, but hopefully they give you a general idea about what some of the arguments are. Personally, I would not like to be drafted, but then again, I believe that a draft truly is needed in certain situations such as World War II. What do you think?

Meet the Blogger

Hey everybody,

     My name is Caeden Moore. I was homeschooled in high school, I am the seventh child of eleven children (six boys, five girls), and I love baseball.

I also currently attend Jacksonville State University in Jacksonville, AL, as a freshman. Growing up in such a large family, while being home schooled, I learned many things that have helped me in almost every aspect of my life. I was born and raised in Sharpsburg, GA, which is about thirty miles south of Atlanta. I played baseball for a homeschool varsity baseball team called the Home Plate Citadels. We played other homeschool teams and private school teams around the country. In the national tournament, I was named "All-American Player" in 2012 and 2013.  Now, with all of that being said, YES... I do have friends. I am pretty out going, easy to talk to, and I believe that I'm a like-able person. I highly cherish the relationships that I have with my family and close friends, as well as my girl friend. I am extremely excited to see what my freshman year has in store for me.